Totenkopf Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2012/02/03/oklahoma-proposal-would-add-tax-to-violent-video-games/ Seems like a fairly dumb idea. Just another prospective money grab... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I get where he's coming from, but all this will succeed in doing is getting people to cross state lines to go VG shopping.He might encourage a certain behavior or discourage another, but ultimately you cannot legislate morality. It's a "love the sin, hate the sinner" type of law. The vagueness in language is potentially misrepresenting what the bill is about if not outright dishonest. Such a piece would give a lot of generalization and in turn power to say what is "violent". It might be better if they made it an "anti-obesity" tax or something. At least then it could cover all video games as he obviously wanted. It really won't happen because people simply aren't going to support it or pay the extra tax. They will find other ways around it. TL;DR: I see what he's trying to do there. He's going about it all wrong. Plus it is foolish and I disagree with it on a personal note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChAiNz.2da Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Fourkiller's proposed legislation would apply 50% of the income from the tax to the Childhood Outdoor Education Revolving Fund as well as the Bullying Prevention Revolving Fund. I'm assuming the other 50% goes to a lobbyist, or to lineup the politician's pocket? I'm never too sure about these crook's methods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 1. Make game that passes E rating 2. Allow 'violence' DLC post-release for download 3. ??? 4. Profit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 They should also have a violence tax on movies and books and for every other form of media too... and not just literal violence that occurs in them but any suggestive form as well that may give people ideas. No exceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Music gets me more worked up than movies, books, games or TV. Perhaps tax stupid politicians proposing stupid bills, we would be in the black in no time. Never mind he is from Oklahoma that explains everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 If we're experimenting with the apparent semantic vagueness of "violence", then maybe we ought to start ticketing people for violent speech and not just "hate speech". Can we tax freeware that contains violence too? Oh goody. :dozey: If I understand this guy's reasoning, vidya is "interactive" and therefore must be specifically taxed because it takes you away from doing other things, where music is not --not in the sense he seems to imply (can't do anything else) anyways. By that logic: books are interactive too since you obviously can't really do much else while reading except maybe run on a treadmill where the machine has a cradle for the book or other read medium. Tele and movies are easier to consume while on a treadmill. Oh wait but those can contain violence too? Hey Totenkopf, I'm confused: is this supposed to be a "violence" tax or just a "vidya" tax? So wonderful to see some of the origin lands of my "tribe" are now inhabited by these folks. >_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blix Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Great another ridiculous bill, but no progress on getting jobs created or affordable medical coverage going? I'm waiting for the breathing the same air tax to go through, I swear Government aka Entertainment Industry (Hollywood) cannot sap enough out of its people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Great another ridiculous bill, but no progress on getting jobs created or affordable medical coverage going? I'm waiting for the breathing the same air tax to go through, I swear Government aka Entertainment Industry (Hollywood) cannot sap enough out of its people. Oh yeah. I heard about that. Taxing people essentially for breathing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 Hey Totenkopf, I'm confused: is this supposed to be a "violence" tax or just a "vidya" tax? It's a misguided and overly selective prospective tax that sets itself up for the following complaint: They should also have a violence tax on movies and books and for every other form of media too... and not just literal violence that occurs in them but any suggestive form as well that may give people ideas. No exceptions. Speaking of half-assed ideas, I understand that running a red light in CA will now cost ~$500. What if you only run a stop sign or make a left on red.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 $500 sounds steep, but so does $300 in Texas for playing a factory stereo too loud. Anyone want to pay it for me? Hell the fine is only $200 for using a cell phone in a school zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 Well, I wouldn't be averse to a $200+ fine for people who use their cell phone while driving just about anywhere...and I ain't talking about hands-free units either. What's "too loud" exactly? Is it completely subjective or is their an actual measure in decibles defining that threshold? Worked a job once on the weekends for a few months where I only had a stereo to keep me company and I cranked that thing up. Good thing I wasn't in TX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Speaking of half-assed ideas, I understand that running a red light in CA will now cost ~$500. What if you only run a stop sign or make a left on red.... Looked up some of the fines: VC16028(A) $796 failure to provide insurance (MAY be REDUCED upon valid proof of correction--fat chance if you aren't local) VC4000 $256 no evidence of current registration (may be reduced upon proof of correction) VC21453(A) $436 failure to stop at a red signal 22454(A) $616 passing school bus with flashing red signals 23123(A) $148 driving while using a wireless phone not hands free, first offense (HAH! Right. This is left to the officer's discretion, so probably more like $250-300) and it only goes up from there. 23123(B) $256 each subsequent offense. (Probably more like $350-$400) 23123.5 $148 using wireless device to read send or write text 23124 $148 minor driving while using a wireless phone. 22500 $976 parking in a bus loading area 22507 (A) $976 violation of disabled parking provisions, first offense. 22507(B) $1876 second offense 27360 $436 Mandatory use of child restraints 34506 $616 Commercial Driver Log Book violation Other stuff is fairly tame from $178-$328 depending what it is. They sure aren't screwing around. Cameras, RFID, and radar sentries are *EVERYWHERE*. (Funny, how are we paying for all this considering we were broke before even installing most of this stuff?...and some freeway flyers looking more like race cars that boast ~200mph top speed. I'm sure those pretty, blinding LED siren lights now on almost every cop car weren't cheap either.) If in SOCAL (namely that stretch between Los Angeles and San Diego on either the 405 freeway or I-5) you are caught violating carpool, you are fined $341. At least for 2010 and 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordOfTheFish Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 This is why I don't bother with politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 What's "too loud" exactly? No clue seems subjective though, I have a 2008 Jeep Wrangler 4dr hardtop. I did get the best factory stereo, but you can barely hear it from outside the car when it is cranked up with the windows up and the roof on. I can turn it up walk 20 feet away from the car and not even know it is on. I will admit with the top off and the doors off it could be annoying to others as I drive down the road or if I was setting in a parking lot. However, I got the ticket in Walmart parking lot Saturday, at the time it was cool and raining so the top was on and the windows were up. I was also parked in the back of the parking lot away from everyone else. There wasn't a vehicle within 20 spaces of me until the motorcycle cop pulled up next to me and turned off his bike. I have no doubt he could not even hear the stereo until he turned off the motorcycle. I could hear the bike drive up with the stereo cranked. I believe he was just wondering what I was doing there just setting with ratdog. I felt it was none of his business and that attitude may have been apparent to him (my mother can no longer drive due to eyesight and I was waiting for her). He asked, I asked why he wanted to know and then he gave me a ticket. He went back to his bike, I turned put on Cheap Trick's "Dream Police." @Darth Avlectus - I really don't have a problem with most of those. The cell phone ones may be a little excessive. I would make the fine double for cell phone violation only if it involved another traffic or accident violation. The one that caught my eye was "27360 $436 Mandatory use of child restraints" that one actually sounds low. Glad to see they take parking in a handicap parking serious. They don't here so people constantly violate that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 Have never seen anyone around here get cited for handicap parking, but have seen a lot of people appear to abuse it (they may have a tag in their car, but when they get out there is nothing obviously wrong with them). My grandfather had one of those when he came to stay with us before dying, so I suspect that some of those people may be using it like that. They aren't hc'd, but they have access to one of those things for the car mirror and use it to park in HC spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 My mom has one. I was told I could use it when driving her around, but I don't. I can drop her off at the front door and then pick her up when she comes out. I would never use it, even after knee surgery in college when the campus police gave me one (for campus only) I didn't park there. I hobbled across the parking lot. Also thought what if someone shows up that really needs it. All you need to get one is for your doctor to fill out he permission form like anything else it can be abused and is abused by some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rtas Vadum Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I find myself highly curious. Mostly because it seems that many people have a vendetta against video games, wanting to change things about the industry, make the games less 'violent', etc. The same people might have the same problem with movies, but it usually relates to one scene, or topic of the movie in general. But with video games, the one issue many tend to jump on, is either that the game is violent, or that it allows the player to get way to close to elicit relations, no matter how much sense such a thing makes sense to the story. It almost seems that with these people, video games lose any credibility they have, simply because a large part of them, is about player choice, which we all know, is about trying to kill everything in sight(doesn't matter if they are trying to kill you), or if we develop a relationship with another character, and we, along with this love interest, want to that the relationship further. But oh no, the first is just violent, and the second is just about the perversion, not about it being a relationship. Alright, maybe it is. But most games that have these sorts of scenes, they are just that. A scene. Scripted, played out before your eyes, without your input(at least not beyond the character you end up doing this with). As for the tax itself, why should anyone have to pay more for a game, just because the game has been branded as violent? Oh, just because anyone who takes the time to sit in a chair for hours on end playing it, might be a child who will get fat, and might get the wrong idea about the game. Sounds to me like another way for parents to avoid raising their children themselves, allowing society to do it for them, even if that is what many believe, ruins a child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.